|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2019 16:41:32 GMT -5
I always thought that , the cover saying it was an imaginary tale, detracted from the drama. I love ya, friend, but those are fighting words in these parts.
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Nov 25, 2019 19:53:38 GMT -5
They are all imaginary stories! That's what's so funny about those DCs, I think most people know this. Supergirl marries Jimmy Olsen... but it's just imaginary, whew! That was close... bow ties give me the willies. Maybe they could've used that cop-out in some of those later Marvel reboots (or maybe they did: uh, Franklin Richards created this whole other dimension and planet Earth see, yeah, that's it... and if you factor in alternate future X, Y and Z and so-and-so's future daughter who will never really exist, with unimaginable powers and torn fishnet stockings...) In my simpler times spiel I totally forgot to include how comic books were once a mass medium sometimes selling multiple millions per issue, back when they were less pretentious and more wholesome. The comic book story is the best form there is for light fantasy with a very visual aspect to it... now I respect that Osamu Tezuka adapted Crime & Punishment, and the Life Of Buddha... but to be honest I'd much rather read his Wonder/Amazing 3, Princess Knight, Astroboy and Jungle Emperor stories! In fact I will say that any comic book fan that doesn't have the one volume collection of the earliest Hi No Tori/Phoenix comics and the two volume Princess Knight set is letting the entire side down! I would like to see the best Dutch Tom Poes (& Ollie B. Bommell) comic story albums of the past available in English!
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,627
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 26, 2019 23:12:18 GMT -5
Although I love reading old Dr. Strange comics, one of the problems with them is that when Strange engages in a magic battle, there's no easily discernible way for the reader to grasp how the spells work or how much damage they're doing. Like, when I see Spider-Man or Daredevil punch a villain, I can connect directly with the action and its consequence because I have fists, I've been punched before, and I've even punched others on occasion. It's very easy to tell from the artwork who's hitting who and how much damage a punch has done. But the magic battles in Doctor Strange are so far removed from our normal human experience that the reader has no reference point; Strange's dialogue has to tell us what is occurring and how hard or not the fight is for him, which doesn't make for terribly exciting comic book battle sequences IMO.
There! I said it.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 26, 2019 23:34:31 GMT -5
Just how long did it take Lois Lane to open that door? Lex probably doubles as an auctioneer for extra cash.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2019 1:11:27 GMT -5
Although I love reading old Dr. Strange comics, one of the problems with them is that when Strange engages in a magic battle, there's no easily discernible way for the reader to grasp how the spells work or how much damage they're doing. Like, when I see Spider-Man or Daredevil punch a villain, I can connect directly with the action and its consequence because I have fists, I've been punched before, and I've even punched others on occasion. It's very easy to tell from the artwork who's hitting who and how much damage a punch has done. But the magic battles in Doctor Strange are so far removed from our normal human experience that the reader has no reference point; Strange's dialogue has to tell us what is occurring and how hard or not the fight is for him, which doesn't make for terribly exciting comic book battle sequences IMO. There! I said it. I've never made webspinners, shot webs, flown on my own power, used repulsor rays or heat vision, wielded a magic hammer that returns when I throw it, wielded a lightsaber fired a ray gun, been a billionaire playboy, flown in a space ship, or used the Force either, but I can enjoy those types of things (and magic) in my comic stories just as much as fisticuffs because its an act of using my imagination even if the writers feel a need to try to over-explain those things. There I said it. -M
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,627
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 27, 2019 1:29:45 GMT -5
Although I love reading old Dr. Strange comics, one of the problems with them is that when Strange engages in a magic battle, there's no easily discernible way for the reader to grasp how the spells work or how much damage they're doing. Like, when I see Spider-Man or Daredevil punch a villain, I can connect directly with the action and its consequence because I have fists, I've been punched before, and I've even punched others on occasion. It's very easy to tell from the artwork who's hitting who and how much damage a punch has done. But the magic battles in Doctor Strange are so far removed from our normal human experience that the reader has no reference point; Strange's dialogue has to tell us what is occurring and how hard or not the fight is for him, which doesn't make for terribly exciting comic book battle sequences IMO. There! I said it. I've never made webspinners, shot webs, flown on my own power, used repulsor rays or heat vision, wielded a magic hammer that returns when I throw it, wielded a lightsaber fired a ray gun, been a billionaire playboy, flown in a space ship, or used the Force either, but I can enjoy those types of things (and magic) in my comic stories just as much as fisticuffs because its an act of using my imagination even if the writers feel a need to try to over-explain those things. There I said it. -M Ah, but you have used your inginuity (webspinners), thrown or shot objects (webs), seen birds in the sky (flight), weilded heavy tools (Thor's hammer), played with toy swords (lightsaber), etc. So you do have a reference point for those types of actions from your own life. However, I think you're actually misunderstanding me (and that may be my fault...perhaps I wasn't clear enough). The issue I have with magic battles in Dr. Strange comics is not about imagining the magic working -- I have an excellent imagination and have no problem with that -- it's more about how hard it is on the comics page for an artist to depict the action in a way that communicates what is happening to the reader. The heavy lifting, in terms of filling the reader in on how the battle is going, is left to the writer. I just think it makes for rather poor "battle" sequences.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2019 2:07:43 GMT -5
I've never made webspinners, shot webs, flown on my own power, used repulsor rays or heat vision, wielded a magic hammer that returns when I throw it, wielded a lightsaber fired a ray gun, been a billionaire playboy, flown in a space ship, or used the Force either, but I can enjoy those types of things (and magic) in my comic stories just as much as fisticuffs because its an act of using my imagination even if the writers feel a need to try to over-explain those things. There I said it. -M Ah, but you have used your inginuity (webspinners), thrown or shot objects (webs), seen birds in the sky (flight), weilded heavy tools (Thor's hammer), played with toy swords (lightsaber), etc. So you do have a reference point for those types of actions from your own life. However, I think you're actually misunderstanding me (and that may be my fault...perhaps I wasn't clear enough). The issue I have with magic battles in Dr. Strange comics is not about imagining the magic working -- I have an excellent imagination and have no problem with that -- it's more about how hard it is on the comics page for an artist to depict the action in a way that communicates what is happening to the reader. The heavy lifting, in terms of filling the reader in on how the battle is going, is left to the writer. I just think it makes for rather poor "battle" sequences. Ah, but then I have had years of playing wizards in tabletop rpgs and having to visualize the effects without a writer doing it for me and played a lot of that time w/o miniatures or props (a style referred to as the theatre of the mind) so I have never had an issue relating to magic battles on the comics page. I also have spent a fair amount of time researching magic in a historical/anthropological sense and observed/participated in a number of magickal or occult rituals, voodoo ceremonies, etc. so I have a reference for magic in comics too. And I think artists like Ditko, Brunner, Starlin et. al. did a masterful job of depicting the surreal. cerebral nature of the action (just as artists have depicted psychic struggles between psionic/telepathic characters like Xavier and the Shadowking for example, on the page and I have had no difficulty identifying/having reference for those even though I do not have psychic powers). I think it comes down to what reference points/experience in imagination one has in one's own life rather than the subject matter being depicted, i.e. the difficulty lies with some readers and not with the content itself. -M
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,627
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 27, 2019 3:02:26 GMT -5
Ah, but then I have had years of playing wizards in tabletop rpgs and having to visualize the effects without a writer doing it for me... As have I. ...and played a lot of that time w/o miniatures or props (a style referred to as the theatre of the mind) As have I. I also have spent a fair amount of time researching magic in a historical/anthropological sense and observed/participated in a number of magickal or occult rituals, voodoo ceremonies, etc. As have I. And I think artists like Ditko, Brunner, Starlin et. al. did a masterful job of depicting the surreal. cerebral nature of the action I still don't think you're getting this. It's not about the technical proficiency or aesthetic merits of the depiction of magic on the comics page. Ditko, Brunner etc did a great job in terms of utilising stunning magical patterns and colours or what have you. It's more a problem with it not being very easy to discern who is winning or losing, or how tough a fight it is, or even what's happening sometimes in a Dr. Strange magic battle, without the dialogue explaining it to you. I think it's just an inherent problem with the depiction of Strange and his opponent, arms outstretched, pulsing magical energy crackling between them, on the comic page. Your mileage may vary. I think it comes down to what reference points/experience in imagination one has in one's own life rather than the subject matter being depicted, i.e. the difficulty lies with some readers and not with the content itself. Glad to know that my experience and imagination is lacking. Yeah, I'm done with this discussion.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 27, 2019 3:32:03 GMT -5
I've never made webspinners, shot webs, flown on my own power, used repulsor rays or heat vision, wielded a magic hammer that returns when I throw it, wielded a lightsaber fired a ray gun, been a billionaire playboy, flown in a space ship, or used the Force either, but I can enjoy those types of things (and magic) in my comic stories just as much as fisticuffs because its an act of using my imagination even if the writers feel a need to try to over-explain those things. There I said it. -M Ah, but you have used your inginuity (webspinners), thrown or shot objects (webs), seen birds in the sky (flight), weilded heavy tools (Thor's hammer), played with toy swords (lightsaber), etc. So you do have a reference point for those types of actions from your own life. However, I think you're actually misunderstanding me (and that may be my fault...perhaps I wasn't clear enough). The issue I have with magic battles in Dr. Strange comics is not about imagining the magic working -- I have an excellent imagination and have no problem with that -- it's more about how hard it is on the comics page for an artist to depict the action in a way that communicates what is happening to the reader. The heavy lifting, in terms of filling the reader in on how the battle is going, is left to the writer. I just think it makes for rather poor "battle" sequences.
Well, this is one area where I think Gene Colan really stood out from the rest of the field: his "mystic bolts" or whatever the hell they were supposed to be really conveyed a sense of power and force that I agree wasn't always apparent with other artists.
OTOH, I like the Ditko approach too: his magical battles were a series of static poses and gestures, but effectively conveyed the impression that the conflict was taking place on a non-physical plane of which we were seeing only the signs and symbols - the stance of the combatants, the weird circles around their hands, etc.
I agree with mrp that I find the standard, physically impossible superhero fistfight takes quite a bit of imagination itself for the reader to enjoy, in that it gives far too slight a sense of the physical world: mass and inertia barely exist, there's little or no feeling of the density and danger of physical objects. This is partly inherent in the nature of the genre but I think has become exacerbated over time: one of the great accomplishments of artists like Ditko or Kirby was to manage to convey a sense of weight and strain even while depicting these crazy acts of lifting up huge boulders or punching someone through a brick wall or whatever, and I think that ability is something that has diminished gradually over time, but especially since the 90s.
But I do think Confessor is right that Doctor Strange requires a special artist, someone who really has a feel for its unusual, I might even say unique, requirements. Some of my favourite artists, e.g. Marshall Rogers, haven't been a good fit for the character to my eyes, though I know a lot of fans will disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 27, 2019 4:13:32 GMT -5
I tend to see it as a feature more than a bug. Of course our mortal senses can't perceive the stakes or ebb and flow of magical conflict!
Heck, I wouldn't mind if the dialog was a little quieter, Karen , STAN.
The surrealistic current of forces beyond the mortal ken loses something when Doc Strange is constantly saying "Had I Not Cast GootheMish's Great Green Fart, My Very Soul Would Have Been Torn Asunder!" It kinda grounds and belittles the art.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 27, 2019 4:20:01 GMT -5
Ah, but you have used your inginuity (webspinners), thrown or shot objects (webs), seen birds in the sky (flight), weilded heavy tools (Thor's hammer), played with toy swords (lightsaber), etc. So you do have a reference point for those types of actions from your own life. However, I think you're actually misunderstanding me (and that may be my fault...perhaps I wasn't clear enough). The issue I have with magic battles in Dr. Strange comics is not about imagining the magic working -- I have an excellent imagination and have no problem with that -- it's more about how hard it is on the comics page for an artist to depict the action in a way that communicates what is happening to the reader. The heavy lifting, in terms of filling the reader in on how the battle is going, is left to the writer. I just think it makes for rather poor "battle" sequences. Ah, but then I have had years of playing wizards in tabletop rpgs and having to visualize the effects without a writer doing it for me and played a lot of that time w/o miniatures or props (a style referred to as the theatre of the mind) so I have never had an issue relating to magic battles on the comics page. Listen, I played D&D yesterday so I'm sympathetic, but I don't see the argument here. Magic spells in RPGs have very specific (often numerical!) effects. Unless your DM is a rock or a piece of scotch tape you have a sense of how your magic is affecting the world around you, especially in fights. When you cast Fireball your enemy takes d6 damage * caster level, half of a save. When you cast Hold Person your enemy is paralyzed, which conveys specific conditions with quantifiable effects. When you cast Sticls to Snakes your friggin' staff turns into a friggin' snake, with numerical statistics conveying it's average/potential effect on the immediate environment. This is literally - and for the first time in the last 100 years of the English language, literally means literally - the exact opposite of the problem that Confessor is having with Doc Strange. Of course you can visualize magic in comics, but you can't tell the effects without narration.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 27, 2019 7:05:28 GMT -5
I see what confessor wrote as being what does and what doesn’t translate in a dramatic fashion on a drawn page. Ina drawn fist fight between Two people, you can tell by the body language and contact points who’s being effected and has the upper hand. In a magic fight - not as much. I’ve heard a similar point made about underwater scenes not having the dramatic impact as other locales.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Nov 27, 2019 10:08:14 GMT -5
While I get what Confessor is saying, I think that's one of the things I liked most about old Dr Strange (and why as good of a movie as Dr Strange was, why it lacked to me) is art of the magic spells themselves. And why certain artists I think did better with Strange than others. While none of the magic really would be discernible without Strange's commentary, I still enjoy it. I also agree with Reptisaurus in that some of the commentary could be left out, as too much ... is well too much. The same as Spidey with his witty banter.
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Nov 27, 2019 10:29:30 GMT -5
I see what confessor wrote as being what does and what doesn’t translate in a dramatic fashion on a drawn page. Ina drawn fist fight between Two people, you can tell by the body language and contact points who’s being effected and has the upper hand. In a magic fight - not as much. I’ve heard a similar point made about underwater scenes not having the dramatic impact as other locales. It's up to the artist to show the relative powers with body language and facial expressions. Is one of the combatants reeling backward while another is leaning into the battle? The pictorial vocabulary would tend to be borrowed from a boxing match or swordfight. Hence this scene below ( Magik #3, 1984) in which Belasco is "obviously outmatched."
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2019 11:08:35 GMT -5
I have more of a problem with depictions of fisticuffs on the comics page that don't follow the rules of physics (since they are defined) and punches that send an unpowered person through a wall but don't break a bone than I do with depictions of magic battles on the page.
I always hear comic fans complaining about magic making some justification for not liking it-"I don't like magic because it's all deus ex machine-whatever the writer wants happens" "I don't like magic because there are no defined rules" "I don't like magic because it's just people standing and pointing" "I don't like magic because it doesn't have a sense of realism or verisimilitude that hand to hand combat does" etc. etc. and it all comes down to trying to rationalize personal preferences into some kind of objective standard of quality to make what they don't like seem inferior to what they do. Hence,to me it is a matter of an issues with the fan/reader, not the material.
If you don't like magical battles in comics it's cool, we all have preferences, but there's no need to try to make some objective reason to justify one's preference. You simply like or don't like the things you do.
-M
|
|